Section 37 Of NDPS Act Doesn't Fetter Grant Of Bail On Ground Of Undue Delay In Completion Of Trial: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ruled that Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, does not fetter grant of bail to an accused on the ground of undue delay in the completion of trial.Justice Navin Chawla held that prolonged incarceration generally militates against the right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India...
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ruled that Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, does not fetter grant of bail to an accused on the ground of undue delay in the completion of trial.
Justice Navin Chawla held that prolonged incarceration generally militates against the right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Section 37 states that bail should not be granted to an accused unless the accused is able to satisfy twin conditions i.e. reasonable ground for believing that the accused is not guilty of such an offence and that the accused would not commit an offence or is not likely to commit an offence, if granted bail.
“From the above, it is apparent that in spite of the stringent test to be met by the accused under Section 37 of the NDPS for being released on bail, it has been held that the same does not fetter grant of Bail to the accused on the ground of undue delay in the completion of trial,” the court said.
Justice Chawla made the observations while granting bail to two accused persons in an NDPS case. It was alleged that six brown-coloured packets were recovered from them containing a Cannabis like substance.
It was the applicants' case that it was the prosecution's case itself that only 12 kg of Ganja was allegedly recovered from their possession, which is an intermediate quantity. According to them, Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which applies to commercial quantities, could not be invoked against them.
They also submitted that the mandate of Section 52A of the NDPS Act was not complied with, and there was no evidence as to how the samples were sent to FSL for obtaining its opinion.
On the other hand, the State submitted that it was only a chance recovery of narcotics from the accused persons and that Section 43 of the NDPS Act will not be applicable in the case.
It was also submitted that mere delay in trial is also not a ground to release the accused persons on bail in such heinous crimes.
While granting bail to the accused persons, the court said that at this stage of the proceedings, the invocation of Section 29 of the NDPS Act against them could not be faulted.
However, it added that it was not explained as to how the samples were thereafter sent to FSL and the report was obtained.
“The Applicants have also alleged that the Malkhana Register has also not been placed on record before the learned Trial Court. The same casts a serious doubt on the case of the prosecution,” it said.
Noting that the applicants have been in custody since December 03, 2020, Justice Chawla said that they ade entitled to be released on bail on the ground that the trial is not likely to conclude anytime soon.
The court said that the accused were young boys and their prolonged incarceration may itself result in the denial of their fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Counsel for Petitioners: Mr.Satya Bhushan, Adv
Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Aman Usman, APP
Title: VISHWAJEET SINGH v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) and other connected matter
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 231